Algorithmic hate speech detection faces significant challenges due to the diverse definitions and datasets used in research and practice. Social media platforms, legal frameworks, and institutions each apply distinct yet overlapping definitions, complicating classification efforts. This study addresses these challenges by demonstrating that existing datasets and taxonomies can be integrated into a unified model, enhancing prediction performance and reducing reliance on multiple specialized classifiers. The work introduces a universal taxonomy and a hate speech classifier capable of detecting a wide range of definitions within a single framework. Our approach is validated by combining two widely used but differently annotated datasets, showing improved classification performance on an independent test set. This work highlights the potential of dataset and taxonomy integration in advancing hate speech detection, increasing efficiency, and ensuring broader applicability across contexts.

While LLMs have shown great success in understanding and generating text in traditional conversational settings, their potential for performing ill-defined complex tasks is largely under-studied. Indeed, we are yet to conduct comprehensive benchmarking studies with multiple LLMs that are exclusively focused on a complex task. However, conducting such benchmarking studies is challenging because of the large variations in LLMs' performance when different prompt types/styles are used and different degrees of detail are provided in the prompts. To address this issue, the paper proposes a general taxonomy that can be used to design prompts with specific properties in order to perform a wide range of complex tasks. This taxonomy will allow future benchmarking studies to report the specific categories of prompts used as part of the study, enabling meaningful comparisons across different studies. Also, by establishing a common standard through this taxonomy, researchers will be able to draw more accurate conclusions about LLMs' performance on a specific complex task.

One of the top complaints data scientists have is the amount of time it takes to clean and label text data to prepare it for machine learning. In fact, it is the complaint. If you're in the data cleaning business at all, you've seen the statistics – preparing and cleaning data can eat up almost 80 percent of a data scientists' time, according to a recent CrowdFlower survey.[1] This means less data is being used. One estimate published by PWC maintains that businesses use only 0.5 percent of data that's available to them.[2] Consider, also, the issues caused by data that's labeled incorrectly.